From the Rolls-Royce experimental archive: a quarter of a million communications from Rolls-Royce, 1906 to 1960's. Documents from the Sir Henry Royce Memorial Foundation (SHRMF).
Assessment of vehicle components and a comparison with a competing manufacturer's chassis.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 125\1\ scan0190 | |
| Date | 21th February 1935 | |
| continued;- - 3 - 21.2.35. gains stiffness from its special front section, the scientific use of pressed metal stiffeners and a sheet metal back floor. It does not seem that much has been done in the way of saving weight, in spite of the advantages the body met get from the rigid well-sprung chassis. 9. EXHAUST. The twin exhaust systems are carried outside the chassis frame, one on each side. In this way there is no need to cut away the cruciform and cross members of the chassis to permit of the passage of the exhaust pipes. 10. PETROL TANK. The capacity seems small in comparison with the consumption of the engine but doubtless weight of tank and its contents had to have consideration. Flexibility of the filler is obtained in a neat manner. The filler is also detachable. 11. BATTERY. This is inaccessible. 12. ENGINE. This lacks protection from mud, etc. thrown up from the road. Those Coachbuilders who visited France were impressed with the silence and suspension of the Cadillac. They have since removed the body from the chassis and partially stripped the former. This has confirmed the impressions they formed in France of the unusual rigidity of the chassis and the excessive weight of the body, which far exceeds anything we could tolerate even on the 40/50 h.p. R-R chassis. These Coachbuilders consider they could build a body for the Cadillac employing their standard methods of construction, which would weigh less than body of the same type built for one of our chassis and this body would stand up equally as well as the heavy American-built body. It should be added that the Coachbuilders who | ||